To understand any phenomenon, its roots must first be understood. Unfortunately, not only do all discussions on the conflict between Islam and the West tend to be limited to the modern era, but when the past, the origins, are alluded to, the antithesis of reality is proffered: we hear that the West—itself an anachronism for Europe, or better yet, Christendom—began the conflict by intentionally demonizing otherwise peaceful and tolerant Muslims and their prophet in order to justify their “colonial” aspirations in the East, which supposedly began with the Crusades.
Bestselling author on Islam and Christianity Karen Armstrong summarizes the standard view: “Ever since the Crusades, people in the west have seen the prophet Muhammad as a sinister figure…. The scholar monks of Europe stigmatised Muhammad as a cruel warlord who established the false religion of Islam by the sword. They also, with ill-concealed envy, berated him as a lecher and sexual pervert at a time when the popes were attempting to impose celibacy on the reluctant clergy.”
That nothing could be further from the truth is an understatement. From the very first Christian references to Muslims in the seventh century, to Pope Urban’s call to the First Crusade more than four centuries later, the “Saracens” and their prophet were consistently abhorred.
Thus, writing around 650, John of Nikiu, Egypt, said that “Muslims”—the Copt is apparently the first non-Muslim to note that word—were not just “enemies of God” but adherents of “the detestable doctrine of the beast, that is, Mohammed.”[i] The oldest parchment that alludes to a warlike prophet was written in 634—a mere two years after Muhammad’s death. It has a man asking a learned Jewish scribe what he knows about “the prophet who has appeared among the Saracens.” The elderly man, “with much groaning,” responded: “He is deceiving. For do prophets come with swords and chariot? Verily, these events of today are works of confusion…. you will discover nothing true from the said prophet except human bloodshed.”[ii] Others confirmed that “there was no truth to be found in the so-called prophet, only the shedding of men’s blood. He says also that he has the keys of paradise, which is incredible.”[iii]
Muhammad is first mentioned by name in a Syriac fragment, also written around 634; although only scattered phrases are intelligible, they all revolve around bloodshed: “many villages [in Homs] were ravaged by the killing [of the followers] of Muhammad and many people were slain and [taken] prisoner from Galilee to Beth…” “[S]ome ten thousand” people were slaughtered in “the vicinity of Damascus…”[iv] Writing around 640, Thomas the Presbyter mentions Muhammad: “there was a battle [Adjnadyn?] between the Romans and the Arabs of Muhammad in Palestine twelve miles east of Gaza. The Romans fled… Some 4,000 poor villagers of Palestine were killed there … The Arabs ravaged the whole region”; they even “climbed the mountain of Mardin and killed many monks there in the monasteries of Qedar and Bnata.” A Coptic homily, also written around the 640s, is apparently the earliest account to associate the invaders with (an albeit hypocritical) piety. It counsels Christians to fast, but not “like the Saracens who are oppressors, who give themselves up to prostitution, massacre and lead into captivity the sons of men, saying, ‘we both fast and pray.’”[v]
Towards the end of the seventh and beginning of the eighth centuries, learned Christians began to scrutinize the theological claims of Islam. The image of Muslims went from bad to worse. The Koran—that “most pitiful and most inept little book of the Arab Muhammad”—was believed to be “full of blasphemies against the Most High, with all its ugly and vulgar filth,” particularly its claim that heaven amounted to a “sexual brothel,” to quote eighth century Nicetas Byzantinos, who had and closely studied a copy of it. Allah was denounced as an impostor deity, namely Satan: “I anathematize the God of Muhammad,” read one Byzantine canonical rite.[vi]
But it was Muhammad himself—the fount of Islam—who especially scandalized Christians: “The character and the history of the Prophet were such as genuinely shocked them; they were outraged that he should be accepted as a venerated figure.”[vii] Then and now, nothing so damned Muhammad in Christian eyes as much as his own biography, written and venerated by Muslims. For instance, after proclaiming that Allah had permitted Muslims four wives and unlimited concubines (Koran 4:3), he later declared that Allah had delivered a new revelation (Koran 33:50-52) offering him, the prophet alone, a dispensation to sleep with and marry as many women as he wanted. In response, none other than his favorite wife, Aisha, the “Mother of Believers,” quipped: “I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires.”[viii]
Based, then, on Muslim sources, early Christian writers of Semitic origins— foremost among them St. John of Damascus (b. 676)— articulated a number of arguments against Muhammad that remain at the heart of all Christian polemics against Islam today.[ix] The only miracle Muhammad performed, they argued, was to invade, slaughter, and enslave those who refused to submit to him—a “miracle that even common robbers and highway bandits can perform.” The prophet clearly put whatever words best served him in God’s mouth, thus “simulating revelation in order to justify his own sexual indulgence”[x]; he made his religion appealing and justified his own behavior by easing the sexual and moral codes of the Arabs and fusing the notion of obedience to God with war to aggrandize oneself with booty and slaves.
Perhaps most importantly, Muhammad’s denial of and war on all things distinctly Christian—the Trinity, the resurrection, and “the cross, which they abominate”—proved for Christians that he was Satan’s agent. In short, “the false prophet,” “the hypocrite,” “the liar,” “the adulterer,” “the forerunner of Antichrist,” and “the Beast,” became mainstream epithets for Muhammad among Christians for over a thousand years, beginning in the late seventh century.[xi] Indeed, for politically correct or overly sensitive peoples who find any criticism of Islam “Islamophobic,” the sheer amount and vitriolic content of more than a millennium of Western writings on Muhammad may beggar belief.
Even charitable modern historians such as Oxford’s Norman Daniel—who rather gentlemanly leaves the most severe words against Muhammad in their original Latin in his survey of early Christian attitudes to Islam—makes this clear: “The two most important aspects of Muhammad’s life, Christians believed, were his sexual license and his use of force to establish his religion”; for Christians “fraud was the sum of Muhammad’s life…. Muhammad was the great blasphemer, because he made religion justify sin and weakness”; due to all this, “There can be no doubt of the extent of Christian hatred and suspicion of Muslims.”
Even the theological claims behind the jihad were examined and ridiculed. In his entry for the years 629/630, Theophanes the Confessor wrote: “He [Muhammad] taught his subjects that he who kills an enemy or is killed by an enemy goes to Paradise [Koran 9:111]; and he said that this paradise was one of carnal eating and drinking and intercourse with women, and had a river of wine, honey and milk, and that the women were not like the ones down here, but different ones, and that the intercourse was long-lasting and the pleasure continuous; and other things full of profligacy stupidity.”[xii]
Similarly, in a correspondence to a Muslim associate, Bishop Theodore Abu Qurra (b.750), an Arab Christian, quipped: “[S]ince you say that all those who die in the holy war [jihad] against the infidels go to heaven, you must thank the Romans for killing so many of your brethren.”[xiii]
In short, the widespread narrative that European views of Muhammad as a “sinister figure,” a “cruel warlord,” and a “lecher and sexual pervert” began as a pretext to justify the late eleventh century Crusade—which itself is the source of all woes between Islam and the West—is an unmitigated lie. The sooner more people in the West understand this—understand the roots of the animosity—the sooner the true nature of the current (or rather ongoing) conflict will become clear.
———————–
[i] Donner, Fred (ed), The Expansion of the Early Islamic State, 2008, 122.
[ii] Ibid., 115
[iii] Hoyland, Robert G, Seeing Islam as Others Saw It, 1997, 57.
[iv] Ibid., 117.
[v] Ibid., 119-121.
[vi] Bonner, Michael (ed), Arab-Byzantine Relations in Early Islamic Times, 2004, 217-226; see also John Tolan, Saracens, 2002, 44.
[vii] Daniel, Norman, Islam and the West: The Making of an Image, 1962, 67.
[viii] Sahih Bukhari 6:60:311.
[ix] Many modern academics portray this fact—that the polemics first made against Islam continued to be made with little variation centuries later—as proof that medieval Christians mindlessly copied and mimicked the early arguments against Islam without much reflection. On the contrary, because these early polemics were so comprehensive and well thought out they continue to be cited to this day by former Muslims as cause for them to apostatize.
[x] Daniel, 4.
[xi] All quotes from John of Damascus, in Bonner, 217-226.
[xii] The Chronicle of Theophanes, trans. Cyril Mango, 1997, 465.
[xiii] Bonner, 223.
good summary Raymond! thanks.
Thanks to the Internet, muslims can now read online the first biography of Muhammad, by the devout muslim Ibn Ishaq:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Ishaq
If you read the biography, you will understand why so-called “extremists” do what they do (they are copying Muhammad), and why so many muslims are leaving Islam now they are finding out the truth.
Muhammad orders his son-in-law Ali, to behead Al-Nadr bin al-Harith on page 136.
Muhammad says that those who follow him will be given paradise; those who refuse will be slaughtered and sent to hell on page 222
Muhammad approves the stabbing of Uqba bin Abu Muayt on page 308.
Muhammad arranges the beheading of Kab bin al-Ashraf on page 364-9.
Muhammad personally beheads over 600 Jewish prisoners of war on page 464
Muhammad orders the torturing of treasurer of Khaybar tribe, Kinana on page 515
Muhammad orders the killing of Abdullah bin Katal’s and one of his singing-girls on page 550-1
Muhammad approves the murder of Asma bint Marwan on page 675-6.
Muhammad arranges the assassination of the old man Abu Afak on page 675.
Muhammad approves the murder of an old one-eyed Bedouin man, by Amr bin Umayya, one of his Jihadist thugs on page 674-5.
http://www.justislam.co.uk/images/Ibn%20Ishaq%20-%20Sirat%20Rasul%20Allah.pdf
I would recommend posting this to any Islamic apologist in the West who would name Muhammad “The Prophet”. You can copy and paste the above, as I have been doing. The truth will out………….
Remembering articles in Dabiq/Rumiyah—it’s still the same primitive “theology,” promises of houris, a shade tree so huge it takes days to ride around it, &c &c &c. All you gotta do is kill all the infidels, then the apostates and the hypocrites.
You don’t have to go back into history to despise the Muzzies. The recent past and present are full of reasons. If you want Islam to start looking better, Raymond, abandon Islam’s murderous, tyrannical ways and join modern civilization.
Raymond Ibrahim is not muslim, he is a Coptic Christian.
Raymond Ibrahim is not defending Islam, nor is he trying to “make it look better”. He doesn’t need to “join modern civilisation” – he is a modern, civilised man explaining how the barbaric nature of Islam has been viewed over the centuries. Have another read.
Um, what? Do you possess no reading comprehension at all?
BTW Mr. Ibrahim is a Christian, not a Muslim, just because his name Ibrahim is spelt with an I rather than A does not make him Muslim. Aramaic was the original language of middle eastern Christians. One of the oldest languages in existence, until the rise of ISIS was also spoken in North West Syria. Mr Ibrahim is not an apologist for Islam, he is an highly educated astute and erudite man. Abraham is latinised, {Constantine first Roman Christian Emperor sire of Roman Catholics}. Just one other detail Aramaic was also spoken by the Nazarines and Gnostic sect of Christianity as well as spoken by Yeshua.
It matters not what Ray’s background is. Please tell me what the Muzzies have done for modern civilization lately.
Muslims has done nothing for humanity MikeyParks s valid point, I join you in this point of view.
Lots of destruction, terror, rapes, pedophilia, thievery, and killings. That’s all they do. That’s Islam’s contributions to societies.
Mike needs to take “Reading Comprehension” classes to learn to grasp the content of what he reads. Good luck.!
Bush , Obama, Merkel among many, love the muslims…
R I is not trying to make Islam look good, he’s showing how through the beginning Christians were able to see the sordid truth about Islam and its satanic prophet. Please read the article again.
This is an excellent article confirming all I was taught in history in the 6th form when taking exams. It surprises me enormously how ignorant people are of the true Muhammad, I guess most people are not thoroughly educated. Thank you for this piece have shared.
It’s essentially everything I learned in school and in private, personal study about Muhammad too, on the “other side of the Pond”, before the fools in charge fell for the lies and began protecting the liars here as well.
I had to turn off PBS last night {a program which I believed was the history of Jerusalem} according to PBS Jerusalem was always Islamic!! I could not believe my ears and eyes no wonder the US kids haven’t a clue. Most of them learn via the tele! rather than books, we have to be the same generation sandraleesmith46?
How absurd is that? David made Jerusalem the capitol of Israel, per God’s instructions to him, about 1,000 years before Jesus was born; and that happened a SOLID 600 years before there was even a Muhammad to form Islam; which means we Christians have a stronger claim than ANY Muslim ever will! But the FACT is it’s Israel’s capitol with a 3,000 + year history! Learning via the tele isn’t the problem so much as the fact that the tele and books they’re given in schools as well are LYING about history, as well as science and other subjects, most of the time, and they have no background or basis on which to recognize that fact. I expect we’re pretty close in age.
Yep I guess we are within a couple of years of each other, how did our generation produce such dumb kids? Though I suspect both thee and me ran a pretty tight ship and our kids were allotted tele time, the rest was playing outside in the back yard, going on long walks and learning holidays covering real history, the rest we had to trust in the school curriculum. Flower power bimbo’s & hippies are still dictating the status quo with a good dollop of Satan thrown in – just look at Hilary & Obama?
I never had kids of my own after raising my siblings. But I think it was because of how so many of our peers were parented, that created the problems. So many parents who came through the Depression and WW II were FAR more “permissive” with their kids; who grew up to BE those hippy/flower power kids. Part of that I also lay to Benjamin Spock’s “Baby Book”, which advocated permissive parenting and was the “bible” for raising the post war kids, largely. In ’72, he finally admitted he maybe made a mistake with that book. And yes, Hillary and O are perfect examples of it; along with Bernie and a mess of the rest in Congress and other positions of power, currently.
Actually the Jews have a better claim to Medina (aka Yatrib – a Jewish town before Mohammed) than the Muslims to Jerusalem.
They have a stronger claim to Mecca too; there was a large Jewish enclave there, as well, ’til Muhammad slaughtered them for not joining him. Probably a whole lot more “Muslim” cities across the ME as well.
They are trying to re-write history so the can feel justified about taking the land from Jews.
Hum you are dead right Tess, **** this for a game of soldiers an old Brit slang for calling the world half mad lacking in objective reasoning.
And Satan makes certain they remain as blissfully ignorant as they are. So he fashions and perpetuates political correctness to foster and guarantee blind acceptance, loyalty and rank stupidity about Islam.
Absolutely, I am glad to say my daughter and her spouse see the scum for what it is. Islam always brings to mind the Temptation of Christ on the Mount as well as Faust oh an I almost forgot the Master & Marguerite all about being fooled by Satan/Muhammad/Islam.
You already know how blessed you really are. Your children are WOKE (as they say in modern-day vernacular). While most Americans, and their families, remain fast asleep. I fear they’ll only wake up when it’s much too late to matter. That time is NOW.
We owe a deep debt of gratitude for courageous scholars like Raymond who will not cower and submit to Islamic propaganda and will tell and teach the truth, the whole truth and nothing but. Quite an uncommon practice these days.
Saint Peter looked also more like Al Capone than an only me if you read the act of apostle 10 about the slaughtering of Anianas.
Excellent article Raymond Ibrahim. Keep them coming.
All prophets before Mohamed received public revelations accredited by prophesies, witnesses and super natural signs. How come the “final and greatest” of all prophets received a private revelation?
There are no witnesses of Mohamed revelation, neither miracles nor prophesies which give credit to Mohamed’s word. Muslims have to believe Mohamed’s own word that the coran fell from heaven into his hands. Even in islamic law you need witnesses for the smallest importance affairs, but some how Mohamed revelation is dispensed of any evidence.
So Islam foundation lays on the credibility of a quite immoral man who produced a book full of errors, contradictions and conspicuous omissions. No wonder islamic faith has to be coerced into people and draconian blasphemy and apostasy laws imposed in Islamic countries.
Mohammed could neither read nor write also. So who wrote it?
“Muslims believe that the Quran was verbally revealed by God to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel gradually over a period of approximately 23 years”
“According to the traditional narrative, several companions of Muhammad
served as scribes and were responsible for writing down the revelations”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran
Those revelations occurred inside Mohamed’s head, during “trance” episodes. Nobody else could heard them. His “trances”‘s external signs are consistent with epileptic fits.
That Gabriel could not possibly be the same Gabriel of the Bible who announced the coming of Messiah (Emmanuel, God with us, who came to earth to save His people from their sins). So it had to be a demon.
Why does Mr Ibrahim start the eleventh para with “EVEN the theological claims behind the jihad were examined and ridiculed…” ? I’d have thought that if jihad were being examined by theologists, it would be ESPECIALLY those claims which would be zoomed in on?
There is no point in discussing the “theological basis” of Islam anyway, because it hasn’t got any. Is it remotely likely that any self-respecting god – (even one so down on it’s luck that it was roughing it in a cave) – would choose one of the most evil tyrants who ever lived as his messenger ? No, and there it ends.
Then there’s the fact that Muhammad claimed that encounter included a severe beating from the “deity” or “angel” whichever; not sure he ever made up his mind which it was he actually encountered in that cave; but it was agreed he was pretty beat up when he got home. There’s not but 1 record of any prophet, or patriarch ever having any kind of physical altercation with Yhwh God, and that was Jacob/Israel, the 1 time, just before his meeting with his estranged brother Esau after all the years he’d been away from home after “cheating” Esau out of their father’s blessing. And all he had to show for it was a dislocated hip.
To be accurate, that altercation was between Jacob and the guardian angel of Esau.
No, in fact, it was pre-incarnate Jesus; it had nothing whatever to do with Esau, except in the timing of the event relative to Jacob meeting his brother again after so long; it was a test of Jacob’s character, and the Being wasn’t actually an angel at all. An angel wouldn’t have the authority to alter someone’s identity as that Person did Jacob’s that day.
Haha! Mr. Copson, might I suggest that your post has a self-contradiction?
What is the contradiction? You, sir, are a “theologists”! You wrote “Is it remotely likely that any self-respecting god…would choose one of the most evil tyrants who ever lived as his messenger ? No, and there it ends.”. That, my friend, is a theological statement!
Whenever I see that Raymond Ibrahim posted a new article somewhere, my heart skips a beat with eagerness to read it and learn more, which is what I do right away.
My respect for this author and his people only grows bigger every time.
Merry Christmas, Mr. Ibrahim, and a Happy New Year to you and all your readers.
what a guy
Interesting read. A couple of years ago I said to my Aunt, a retired Nun that the description of the Muslim Allah fitted neatly to that of Lucifer; we went through the comparisons piece by piece and agreed that the Modern Allah is in fact Lucifer, the name having been stolen from the Aramaic ‘Allah’ for God.
Glad you understand that fact, while most do not.
Thank God that ‘President Donald Trump’ claimed Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Which it always was. The first time Israel or Canaan was called Palestine was by the Romans who called it ‘Syria Palestina’. God Himself said it was the promised land and given to Abraham who was a Jew. It was never muslim or anything else. Mo was never a prophet. Why would he have a six year old girl as a wife, if he was a true prophet of God?#! That’s because he never was a prophet but a looter and pillager and rapist.
According to Bat Ye’or in her book EURABIA, one of the items in the agreement between the traitor European sellout politician, among many, Islam was to be presented in Europe in historical books, educational institutions, midia, etc under a positive light, the reality should be embelished and the population lied to about how wonderful, peaceful,intelectual, cerebral islam is. This istarted after WW II with Charles De Gaule in France and the Germans in exchange for oil and rich contracts in the ME. It was the origin of the EU when other countries were brought into the fold and Europe totally submitted to the demands of the rich ME oil nations, including mass muslim immigration into Europe , the pro islam brainwashing of the population, and ignoring islamic terrorist attacks in Europe and around the world. The result is the islamization of Europe, which has become Eurabia.
It is strange how a modern society as we enjoy in the West is so willing to create the “narrative” of pious Islam and the good Muslim who is a victim in need of protection from our views and from the truth about Islam which the media tell us is not really Islam…they posit that terrorism and misogyny, honor killings, and rape gangs and antisemitism and anti-Christianity and conquest and anti-Infidelism are all distortions of Islam carried out by a very small group that want to bring discredit to Islam.
Apparently, if we are to believe the CBC, BBC, France 24, PBS, NPR, etc., we drive the Muslims to kill each other and us.
We all know the facts and the above article points them out quite expertly. There is only one Islam and no moderate aspects to it. You either buy into it or you are apostate.
Note that people who speak out and speak the truth are being fired in Canada for doing so in very intelligent and respectful ways. The messenger is now being punished. Read the plight of Christine Williams who was fired from an important role in government for researching and writing her factual articles.
How do we counter Leftists in power who are being influenced, threatened and under legal pressure to kowtow to the Muslim politics and religion? Why are “liberals” so eager to satisfy the demands of Islamists?
There are those in the West who choose to remain blind and deaf to the truths about Islam and its founder. Many of them are highly “educated” and have traveled extensively including in Islamic areas and they remain blind. A neighbor who is such a one has a “Coexist” sticker on the family vehicle.
I wrote this article a few years ago:
“The Truth About Islam”
https://grandmageri422.me/2015/09/05/the-truth-about-islam-4/
Watch “Son of Hamas” Mosab Hassan Yousef, speak at the U.N. and shock Arabic members:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2NaiX-hvVQ
Yes; he does! When I heard his “apology”, such as it was, back in ’72, it made me sick, because I realized he’d already screwed up an entire generation of kids, almost across the board. My parents got that book but used it for kindling in the fireplace before it did too much harm. Being a veteran, I don’t take “Hanoi Jane” at all! Not after she betrayed our POWs to the Vietcong, for trying to send out messages to their families to let them know their service members were still alive. As for Mia Farrow, just another Hollywood flake.
At least Trump isn’t bowing to China and the Muslims; that’s an huge start! And he’s standing for America first, instead of everyone else. I hope this presages a drop in their power level! You have a spectacular New Year too, and a blessed year to follow, Vivienne!
Not off hand; but numerous BIBLE scholars do; having studied Jesus and His Words, as well, and realized what many OT only scholars apparently MISSED, just as they did the dual advents prophesied by Isaiah, so plainly. The Torah is only part of the revelation of Yhwh God to His people. Jesus appeared many times in the OT records, in fact, and interacted with various of the OT persons, from Adam and Eve, to Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and even David, on a more physical plane.
let’s face they can’t, this mad mob of Ishmaeli’s introduced Sutti to India. Just the other day I received notification that an Ishmaeli sect somewhere in the far East, judging by the men burying a young woman alive I’d say could have been Rohingya. Poor girl couldn’t have been more than 20, these sick savages placed a heavy concrete or stone on top of her, then laid the dead husband on the stone, her screams were horrific. Sick Savages Ishmaeli’s, what can we expect from a madman like Muhammad. Will these brainwashed illiterates ever wake up and learn to read for themselves instead of taking the word of an equally stupid Imam as gospel?
I am afraid I must agree with JewishOdysseus on this point sandraleeesmith46.
Apparently frontal lobe damage resulting in epilepsy can also account for the hatred destruction of dogs, music, dancing, singing, and rejoicing. You see, patients with frontal lobe damage are very sensitive to loud noises… besides barking, dogs alert and protect their family and zoeadtrians Christians and Jews all love animals generally. So naturally Mohammed the epileptic hated them and all things noisy. Curious as to when the Islamic “call to prayer” became a rule.
Utterly brilliant – another ACT OF GOD on MECCA – we should all pray for such an event.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvfyeeqyWyk
Sent out several emails with vid attached.
Incredible new info on wether or not Mohammed existed. The logic is flawless
If the info is on the video I don’t have good enough broadband here in rural Ireland. But this guy must have written a book so I will try to locate it. Viv
Robert Spencer wrote one on wether or not Mohammed existed. I believe it followed this gentleman. That’s the closest I’ve found to a book explaining it. The vid is extremly provocative. Wish I could help you more.
Apparently Petra is the holy Quran in city, NOT Mecca!
No need to look into the roots really. The victims of islam are many. You people must be kept on check. Controlled and ruled properly. Only then you can call yourself peacefull. If we can talk about any other religion and critisize it – we will talk about islam the same way if we want to. Telling us that you are better than others will make it worse. Stop killing, stop throwing acid, stop all this crap first. Long articles will not help, sorry. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/273ae6bdfa1df4c77a7b9774b984b72ad94131c4ee7d5e86b8d170a90a59ddf7.png